-
Why is Keyframing in FCPX so shite?
-
[Nikolas Bäurle] “I never liked Avids keyframing, but I’ve always liked working with the software.”
Let’s face it, in video edits, quite a lot of the keyframing is simple linear moves. A push on something, a photo montage, etc. What I liked in Avid, aside from the fact that you could actually copy and paste keyframes, was that when you had a keyframe at the start and end of a clip, then added a dissolve, it would actually expand the keyframes out to cover the dissolve. I guess it could screw you up if that’s not what you wanted, but 99.9% of the time that was what I wanted. Legacy and X both default to not extending the keyframes. So you either have to make your keyframes, add your dissolve and extend them manually, or you have to make your keyframes in the dark with the dissolves already in place.
-
[Chris Jacek] “If the best argument for keyframing in Motion is to use behaviors, then isn’t that in and of itself an indictment of Motion’s keyframing process?”
No. It means that behaviors are incredibly easy to use and are a very powerful way to get great animated moves without having to keyframe. Or script It says nothing about keyframing.
[Chris Jacek] “Until you tell me that I can grab a whole stack of keyframes from different layers, representing different parameters, drag on them with a modifier key, and proportionally shrink or expanding their timing together, I won’t be impressed.”
Then prepare to be impressed because Motion can do that very easily. Nobody beats AE for keyframing, but you seem to be laboring under false prejudices if you think Motion can’t do things like that.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Bret Williams] “You’re describing AE’s keyframing, right? Because AE can certainly do that. Easily.”
Yes, exactly. The option-drag (or alt-drag on Windows) of an array of keyframes is probably in my “Top 10” of AE additions over the years.
Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee -
Keyframing in AE is absolutely not subpar, nor is it in Motion. Both applications offer very precise and intuitive keyframe animation options. Behaviors in Motion are actually quite powerful. You can apply a Behavior to quickly create a complex animation and then (for most Behaviors) you can convert the Behavior into physical keyframes (CMD+K) to further tweak the animation.
Yes you can easily paste entire collections of keyframes from multiple layers onto others in Motion. Not by option-dragging to be fair, but by a simple copy/paste action, which comes down to the same.
And yes you can proportionally shrink or expand the timing of keyframes in Motion. Actually this works exactly like in AE.
Let’s face it, in video edits, quite a lot of the keyframing is simple linear moves. A push on something, a photo montage, etc.
I totally agree, that’s what we use keyframes for most of the time in an NLE. And just like you I really liked the auto extending capability in Avid. I cannot tell you how frustrating it was when we switched to FCP having to manually adjust every keyframe whenever you wanted to extend an animation or when adding a dissolve between two animated clips.
But in FCPX you do have a similar feature. When you use the Crop > Ken Burns effect to create a simple linear move or push and then you extend your clip the animation timing will adapt automatically. Same as when you put a transition between two animated clips the start and end of the animations will automatically extend under the transition. This does not work for complex manual keyframing yet, but for simple linear moves it is perfect and we use it all the time.
Now back to the OP: as a hardcore FCPX user and proponent I agree that manual keyframing in the Viewer is shite. So I don’t blame you for ranting, we all have had such moments in X ((-:
Workarounds do not justify the lack of proper interpolation behavior in the Viewer. Fortunately there are a few ways to skin a cat in X and keyframing in the Inspector does work quite well, same as using the Crop tool for creating simple linear moves and pushes works exceptionally well and fast. All of these should be grouped into one powerful keyframe animation editor like in Motion, or we should get a fully seamless integration with Motion straight from the FCPX timeline. Now wouldn’t that be “awesome”.
-
Bret, I didn’t know Avid extended Keyframing:-) I never thought of that, since I always thought it was normal to move keyframes after adding transitions.
I have to admit that I’ve rarely had to use Avids Keyframing, and in my case its actually more about the way that Avid dealt with effects in general that I stopped liking once I started using FCP 2. To me it was more a user interface issue than anything else. The fact that you could simply drag a jpeg into FCP, and didn’t have to use the pan and scan effect was one of my main issues, and I liked not having to nest each effect. At some point I started fiddling with AFX and Shake, and I kept on getting FCP jobs, so I only and still use Avid at DW-TV, and in Newsediting or Documentaries there just isn’t much animating going on, since the grafics department delivers all that.
In the last few years though I’ve had to animate jpegs and build some cut-out style animations more and more, and Motion has come in very handy. For the things I’m doing, AFX is too much, Motion is more intuitive to use in my opinion, and for the simple things its faster.
“Always look on the bright side of life” – Monty Python
-
[Ronny Courtens] “All of these should be grouped into one powerful keyframe animation editor like in Motion, or we should get a fully seamless integration with Motion straight from the FCPX timeline. Now wouldn’t that be “awesome”.”
I question whether that’s possible. FCP X was a total rewrite. I don’t think Motion was. Its rewrite was more cosmetic than functional. In fact, certain processes work completely differently in FCP X versus Motion. For example, if you put a 23.98p clip into a 29.97i timeline (in the NTSC world), X applies the proper 2:3:2:3 cadence to the fields. Motion applies a 2:2:2:4 cadence, which is wrong. That’s how FCP 7 works/worked, so it seems like Motion still has some legacy code to deal with under the hood.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Ronny Courtens] “Behaviors in Motion are actually quite powerful. You can apply a Behavior to quickly create a complex animation and then (for most Behaviors) you can convert the Behavior into physical keyframes (CMD+K) to further tweak the animation.”
Agreed! One of the terrific things about Motion.
[Ronny Courtens] “All of these should be grouped into one powerful keyframe animation editor like in Motion, or we should get a fully seamless integration with Motion straight from the FCPX timeline. Now wouldn’t that be “awesome”.”
It would, indeed. But I agree with Oliver’s assessment. Tighter integration would be wonderful, but Motion is still very much the program it was three years ago, while X is a completely different beast. I suspect that if true integration were easy, it would have been accomplished by now. Still, it would be nice. Awesome, even.
-
[Bret Williams] ”
You’re describing AE’s keyframing, right? Because AE can certainly do that. Easily.”I’m not sure I’d say it’s easy to manipulate multiple keyframes in AE. There is absolutely no keyframe grouping in AE. So you have to hunt them down everytime you want to make an adjustment. Often finding all the keyframes you want to adjust is like finding a few needles in a haystack and sometimes and errant click will make you have to start selecting over again. I think there’s a lot of room for improvement even in AE.
-
I hoped you had an answer but I just tried making a simple scale and position move using only the inspector. Nope. Still get easing on the in/out points. Not linear. Same results I get when using the transform tool in the viewer. Problem is the scale has easing, but the position doesn’t. If they both had easing, that would actually be nice.
If you can’t change the easing, then it won’t visually be linear. It’ll have this little s curve to the push in that looks like crap.
-
[Brett Sherman] “The only software I’ve ever used that comes close to being usable is AE, and even that could use a lot of help. I don’t know what it is about keyframing that no one seems to be able to get it right.”
What do you think everyone is missing on keyframing? What sorts of features are you looking for?
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up